Change Your Image
timmyminh
Ratings
Most Recently Rated
Lists
An error has ocurred. Please try againReviews
Offret (1986)
Existential piece of visual poetry
I, like many people I believe was taken aback my the sheer slow-paced boredom of the film. I admit I did became a bit weary while watching. But then the more I watch it, the more I started noticing something and the more I started to understand the film. That was when the existential dread started to creep in and I found myself consumed by the sheer eerie, almost lifeless meditating atmosphere.
Watching a Tarkovsky sure is not easy. Tarkovsky makes films like writing poetry: you cannot understand the depth of a piece of poem but you can still feel it while reading and ruminate on it afterwards. Tarkovsky is probably the most intellectual filmmaker in history alongside Stanley Kubrick. FIlms about the inner space and outer space of humanity. The films of Tarkovsky was made to be felt not understood, the analysis part comes after.
Nomadland (2020)
I will defend this film to my last dying breath
There are way too many negative reviews about this picture but it is noticeable that most of the reviews and its criticism are just mostly that it is boring or forgettable or no plot. To me, this is my favorite film of 2020 and I was overjoyed when it won Best Picture, it restored my faith in the Oscar, that a small-scale independent arthouse film with simplistic and minimalistic production could win major awards.
The cinematography is mostly consist of natural lighting but the tweak about it fits the mood of the movie so well. This atmosphere of wandering, meditativeness overcomes our collective unconsciousness, it helps us the audience to sit right into the world and perception of Fern. The genius directing of Chloe Zhao is commendable, especially how Terrence Mallick-esque the style it, I wouldn't be surprise if Miss Zhao drew her inspiration from Mr. Mallick. Somehow, Chloe Zhao found the absolute perfect way to tell the story and paint the world of the nomad.
The acting. It's unbelievable how believable all our characters are in the film. Frances McDormand made me feel like I wasn't watching an acting performance but I felt like watching firsthand a nomad. The heart of the film for me is Swankie and her monologue, it maybe to me, one of the most emotional moments in any films ever. Sometimes I think about Swankie and I'd smile. The second moment that hits me is the raw and honest conversation with Bob Wells at the end. And that's what everything about this film is, very raw, emotionally raw.
As for how "boring" this film is. What on earth do you expect the story of a nomad's life is supposed to be told? With dramatic heaving scenes that makes you basked in suspense? With riveting thrilling storytelling? With exciting and roaring undertone? No, this is the life of a nomad. Telling it in any "exciting" and "non-boring" ways would criminally betray the realism of the story. I heard some criticism about how at least Chloe Zhao could make the film less boring by adding narration by our main protagonist. That again, would hugely betray the integrity of the story's realism. What do you think, after losing her job, house, and husband whom she adores, that a person's mind are going to be? A reservoir of poetic thoughts and insightful observations about life? No, it is numb and meditative as it can be as she goes through processing her past and ease into a healing odyssey. We the audience are behooved to see the world through the eyes of Fern in that same light. Why rely on unnecessary exposition while you could you utilize on visuals storytelling? Why wish the movie to spoon feed you with a narrating guide while you could instead watch it unfolds yourself? If anything, verbal exposition would completely and utterly destroys the movie. You don't watch Nomadland coming out of it saying, "I ENJOYED it" or "that was FUN" because it is not meant to be "enjoyed" or "fun". It is meant to be a study that provokes thoughts in you, and it's meant to be a poetic portraiture that stimulates a feeling in you.
To me, the negative response to films like Nomadland shows me a lot about the modern take on cinema by contemporary viewers. When you go and see a movie, you subconsciously (not consciously) expects something INTERESTING that can wow you, we always expect deep inside that "gee whiz" factor in our prejudgement of a film. Our minds are too cluttered with underlying unconscious wants for a film and that disappoints us when a film can do much more. Films like Nomadland should continue to be produced and filmmakers like Chloe Zhao must be seen more and more because they defy what society expects in a film. A piece of cinematic art does not have to cater to the audience's likings, it adheres to a higher form, and that is artistic values. It is the job of the filmmaker, like any artists, to tell their story for the sake of their artistic command, not to cater to what the audience wants. Quentin Tarantino once said when his debut film Reservoir Dog was criticized by his producer for being too bloody that no one would want to watch it, "This is my film, I made it for me, I don't care who watches it". This same mindset must perpetuates in the film industry and audience like me will rejoice and celebrate the creative freedom that filmmakers like this brings.
Lastly, I would also say that I love Nomadland due to a personal reason. The film makes me feel like I have lived this life before, the color, the journey, the encounters, the lifestyle, even though I haven't.
Thank you Chloe Zhao, I watched this film by pirating it since I couldn't go to the cinema but after watching it, I paid for the film and bought it fair and square to give Chloe Zhao the money she deserves. I will defend this movie against any criticism out there even if it's the last thing I do.
Arrival (2016)
Existential & Beautiful
I came to Arrival expecting to see an entertaining blockbuster alien sci-fi thrillers, sort of like Skyline. But instead, my god, I got something light years better! It made me think and feel at the same time afterwards. No films have made me this way. A perfect amalgamation of intellectual prose and emotional poetry. It was existential and beautiful... at the same time. Very few films can coalesce these two hallmarks so harmoniously and poetically - exploring the existential concept of time & language and then makes us see how it'd influence you on a profound emotional level. If you can have your whole life lays out before your eyes from start to finish, would you change things? Arrival has become one of my favorite films of all time!
The Lighthouse (2019)
Lovecraftian or Freudian?
The Lighthouse is probably the closest we have to a modern day The Shining. I'm surprised nobody points out how Lovecraftian this picture is, the fact that there could be some overarching cosmic ancient thalassic forces puppeteering the lives and mental planes of these two men. The film references numerous mythological details to support that (killing of a seagull, Neptune's curse, tales and visions of mermaids, the prophetic fate of Winslow). Thomas Wake resembles a high priest, chosen to be exposed to the sacred knowledge in the light and assigned to guard and worship the divinity of the sea. Winslow resembles the mortal man who covets for that knowledge and mystery be shared to him. And then curiosity kills the cat. The cosmic forces damned him, through Thomas Wake as its medium, for desiring and coveting this secret as he is unworthy and too fallen to dare to look upon the face of the divine. This resembles a chapter in the Exodus that says, "You shall not look upon my face, for no one can see me and live".
On the other hand, it could be all Freudian, two men doomed to isolation, no one from civilization but themselves and no women to meet their sexual impulse. Surrounding you nothing but rocks and sea and seagulls and one lighthouse, and your daily activities and meals are mundane and mediocre. All of which factors can drive a man insane. Not to mention, residing on that island carrying with you emotional and psychological baggage while being stuck with a man with facetious and authoritarian habits. And amidst of this, the two men look to a tower of light as a source of beauty and majesty. While in actuality, it's just a lighthouse.
Finally, on the lighthouse. The final scene, Winslow finally uncovers what is in the light, which drives him to scream in a state of delirium and befallen to his prophetic fate. This is where the "Lovecraftian or Freudian" element is strongest: whether he looks into the light and sees everything or he looks into the light and see nothing. Both possibilities so terrifying and so existential it can descend a man to madness...
La La Land (2016)
A True Modern Classic!
La La Land mesmerized me of how visually good it is. You can just lay back in the cinema and admire the grandeur of the intensive art direction of it. Viewing this reminds me of my first time viewing Cinema Paradiso in a London theater... it was beautiful.
Damien Chazelle shocked me of how phenomenal his directing is. You can tell from this picture and Whiplash that he is truly an admirer of classic art and of theater. Definitely will be researching and studying his material much more.
The premise of La La Land is of pro-nostalgia. My friend came up with an interesting argument about the contrast of ideas between La La Land and Midnight In Paris. So Woody Allen's Midnight in Paris based itself on the premise of anti-nostalgia - delineating the proposition that nostalgia is ultimately denial; denial of the present and a clinging and ruminating onto the past. Hence, Midnight in Paris is a critique of nostalgia and an antithesis to La La Land. In contrast, La La Land sets out both sides of the argument - one is Sebastian who's passion resides with the past, whereas his friend Keith argues for revolutionary jazz, a fusion between the classics and modernism. In a way, you can see that Keith is correct and he started singing this recast version of jazz using traditional instrument accompanying with synthesizer. You can read this film in a Hegelian dimension (a thesis, an antithesis, and the synthesis). The thesis is Sebastian's argument for classic jazz; the antithesis is Keith's counterargument for contemporary sound. Finally, the synthesis is the metamorphosis of the two premises. However, the metamorphosis or synthesis in this case is Sebastian's realization of what he wants to do with his passion and talent. Whether he'd be content in a modernist environment where (we can tell) he doesn't fit in, but only doing so to feel relevant. Or pursue his roots which is classical jazz. And ultimately, the synthesis of Sebastian's arc is that he preserves classical art and, like Mia said, people will listen to him because they'd see how passionate he is. And from there, they'll begin to see the beauty of jazz.
Another dimension of the film is the romance between Sebastian and Mia. They both have their own insecurities with their ambitions (Sebastian with a jazz musician career and Mia with an acting career). And they both try to complement each other's insecurities and build each other up. The beauty of their relationship is at the end where Sebastian dwells on this montage of possibilities where their love could have been only if they overcame their insecurities. So their romance underscores the concept of music in this film. Why? Because to me, La La Land is a concept - it's a land where language is music. And the fun and beauty of life, from the mediocre to the majestic, is spoken and celebrated through music. It's almost like our concept of America being the land of freedom & opportunities. However, just like with America, there is a darker truth to it - in La La Land, Sebastian imagines this world where him and Mia had fallen in love and complement each other's dreams through a musical odyssey. Then immediately, it cuts back to the reality - that their relationship is broken, they have both moved on and they could never lived up to the ideas of what La La Land is supposed to be about.
Oh and one more aspect of this film is that Damien Chazelle never said classical art is better than contemporary art. Like one of those "I-was-born-in-the-wrong-generation" and "I'm-smart-because-I-listen-to-50s-jazz-and-you-don't" kinda situation. It never serves to moralize the audience, trying to preach this preference towards the past. But rather I feel like he's saying, "these type of music will never die" and that no matter what, classical jazz will live on forever, and contemporary jazz can never replace it.
That's just a way for me to read this film. Anyway, by and large, this beautiful picture makes me say proudly, "now THAT'S what I call modern classics!".
Schindler's List (1993)
Titanic-sized Piece of Cinema
This was the only and I mean ONLY time a film has made me cry ugly like a baby. There has been films that make me emotional to the verge of tears but never to make me bawl like an actual baby. I mean... the Holocaust... just wow... pure evil, such evil. Needless to say, this film exacerbates my contempt and anathema towards Nazism. And the worst thing about this is that the Nazis weren't just some foreign diabolical entity from some other dimension, they were humans.
The stars of this film are the victims (or survivors) of this ordeal. Spielberg has done a great job making it so, and he uses different techniques to make these characters memorable to us. For example, how Helen Hirsch has to constantly repeat her name to the officer when her character was first introduced. This was as if this was Spielberg's way of making us remembering her name because her story will be very crucial and very shattering later. Spielberg also uses other methods, particularly the heartbreaking and sublimely powerful tribute to the survivors and the victims at the end... I could never stop crying at that.
We have a lot to learn from Spielberg as film students. I think personally Spielberg is my favorite director when it comes to camera movement and Schindler's List is a treat for those interested to enhance their camera movement techniques. Particularly Spielberg's use of eye-tracing, such as at the beginning when introducing Schindler at the party, that was so intelligently done. Then of course, we have the highlighting of the girl in red, showing innocence wandering seamlessly amidst animosity and inhumanity.
Spielberg also was a master in this film for the contrast technique. Specifically the two consecutive cuts of Schindler shaving then of Goeth shaving side by side. This was meant to show two opposing spirits. One yin and one yang. Then if you notice, the cinematography done on Schindler's face is almost bright and flare-like whilst the cinematography done on Goeth is dark and Ralph Fiennes' eyes deadly and fiendish. Additionally, there was another scene where the workers are onboard the train to Schindler's factory and feeling crammed and couldn't breathe, Schindler was wearing an all white business outfit while the other officers wore your typical dark SS uniforms. Again, another contrasting technique showing Schindler being almost an element for good and the other for evil. But the best is that Spielberg never tried to portray Schindler as an all-good saint, he is not without with flaws: a drunk, a careless businessman, a materialist, a womanizer. And yet, he acknowledges that amidst all these attributes, he could've done better. He wasn't someone who'd stand in front of Hitler's desk pounding on the table shouting this was wrong... but he wished he could've.
The score by John William is probably one of the best piece of music ever composed. How John Williams fine-tuned the orchestra to a Krakow-like haunting tune that cries for the wasted lives of this stupid war. John Williams is one hell of an underrated composer and yes I know he won like 4 Oscars for Best Original Score before but ask yourself how many aspiring film score composers know him?
This film was criticized by Terry Gilliam for being sort of a positive happy ending kind of movie that does not show the painful magnitude of the Holocaust. I'd have to very much disagree because I think I miss the happy ending of Schindler's List somewhere. The fact that Spielberg made this and Jurassic Park at the same time is beyond me. Overall, this film is well in my top 10, that 8.9 on IMDb is 100% well-deserved. Boy, a titanic of a film...
Pulp Fiction (1994)
An Overrated Awesome Movie
Now I know when you read the title of my review you may think it's such an oxymoron but it's exactly what it says: Pulp Fiction is a awesome and brilliant and smart film but it's overrated. People like to toss the word "overrated" as if it's a synonym for "bad" but it just means something is being valued more than it should be. In other words, I don't think Pulp Fiction is 8.9 great but like an 8.1-8.3 kind of great.
Pulp Fiction with its witty dialogues, non-linear structure of storytelling, entertaining moments and characters, subtle details in screenwriting are not enough to convince me that it is 8.9 good. And I've watched and studied this film as much angles and layers as a film student could and still fail to see why it is 8.9 and is on par with The Godfather, The Shawshank Redemption, 12 Angry Men, Schindler's List, and The Dark Knight - all of which are titanic achievements in cinema.
But don't let those dilute you to think I think this film sucks, like I said it deserves probably 8.1 to 8.3 at the most. So I will lay out why I think Pulp Fiction is still great.
The witty dialogues: Quentin Tarantino easily stands among legendary screenwriters such as Aaron Sorkin, Eric Roth, Tom McCarthy, etc. in terms of dialogue writings. They are smart, entertaining, engaging. How Tarantino wrote the diner scene where Vincent Vega and Mia Wallace was spending an entire minute of screen time ordering the food and still keep the audience intrigued: this is because he uses exotic terms for the food and uses the character's reaction to those exotic names. That's how to make it interesting.
Furthermore, it adds such smart details into the plot for example the fact that Butch and Marsellus spent minutes agreeing that Butch should throw his fight only to be sabotaged in under 30 seconds after Butch interacts with Vincent Vega. Vince calling Butch a "palooka" and "punchy" (both are affronts to a boxer, more than that, a person with a warrior complex like Butch), then Butch sees that Vince and Marsellus are good friends hugging each other. This crucial 30 seconds change the plot forever, causing Butch to not throw the fight and the lives of him, Marsellus, and Vincent Vega to be subsequently changed forever. This was such smart writing.
Of course, the entertainment in this film is such thrilling: the OD of Mia Wallace and the anticipation on whether the situation can be salvaged; the rape scene and how our characters overcome that in a satisfying way; Samuel Jackson's character Jules' wittily intimidating lowkey comedic dialogues.and the diner robbery then the showdown between Pumpkin and Jules is such breathtaking. Then of course, the iconic Pulp Fiction dance, what can I say?
Pulp Fiction's message hidden in hindsight is ultimately that of redemption or choosing the right path for life. For Mia Wallace, she chose the druggie life only to be end up on the verge of death, after the morbid experience we can see her soften somehow. Maybe then she will turn to righteousness and redemption. Next, Butch's family background were all warriors which is why he chooses to be a boxer but then the warrior element doesn't come in until he made decision on whether to save Marsellus Wallace his enemy or not from the degenerate hillbillies. Which is why he chose a Samurai sword out of all things. Finally, Jules' arc is that he realizes he only survive an ordeal through "divine intervention" and deliberate that this is a sign and if he doesn't stop being a proxy in this business now then more a dire fate may ensue upon him. Hence why he shows mercy to Pumpkin a diner robber and he rethinks the interpretation of his Bible verse.
Overall, we can see the source for a person's switch to righteousness doesn't just come from religion (which is what most people think because they only focus on Jules' arc), but it comes from many things: a brush with mortality (Mia Wallace), family values (Butch), salvation from a foe (Marsellus Wallace), and faith (Jules). The only character who was not enlighten to this revelation was Vincent Vega because his lifestyle is too deeply embedded in this criminal and toxic underworld. Furthermore, he's too absent-minded and too shallow to comprehend a deeper deliberation in life as Jules. Hence why he does not buy into Jules' interpretation of divine intervention.
The dialogue writting of Tarantino is just like his plot writing: it starts with one point then spirals into a whole different place in a way that is entertaining. This is because real life dialogues and real life events are exactly the same. This is why Tarantino's writing is so great. And overall, Pulp Fiction is great is awesome is smart and easily win a place in my top 30. But of course, as I said, I still don't get and probably never will understand why it is 8.9 and is top 6 of the best film ever made despite of how much I said I love it above and the many explanations and readings of this film that I have read.
Midnight in Paris (2011)
Surrealism on Film
I hesitated watching this film for a long time, I don't know why. But boy was this film a treat for classical oafs like me. The film opens with a series of montage of contemporary Paris: the Eiffel, the Louvre, the Arc de Triomphe, the Notre-Dame, as well as little corners of the city. The fact that they are contemporary says that it's both Paris and not Paris at the same time.
Hence, the film follows up with this fantasy odyssey of our protagonist Gil into this dream-like and back-in-time world meeting artists like Hemingway, Fitzgerald, Stein, Picasso, Salvador Dali, the jazz age fashion, the falling in love in the streets of Paris etc. - all of which is a tribute to the classiness and classical of Paris. You can say it gives us the audience a sense of nostalgia - which is interesting because a line from the film suggests that nostalgia is ultimately denial of the present and indulging in this inner yearning for a time long gone. I wonder if this was a playful detail by Woody Allen haha.
Speaking of the man, Woody Allen wrote and directed the film like it was a novel, the dialogues are so amusing to follow. He uses the static shots provide that sense of easing and mesmerizing to watch, making it feels like dreaming a beautiful and mischievous dream ruminating and reminiscing back in time.
Hillbilly Elegy (2020)
Amy Adams & Glenn Close - I smell an Academy Award nomination
Okay I'm not gonna even bother reading the reviews after seeing it's 6.7/10 (maybe it shall increase in a month and I hope it does), they're just going to be a lot of hates or whatnot which only going to serve to disturb by love and enjoyment for this film. So I'm just gonna say how much I love this picture.
Hillbilly Elegy is about family and I guess a lot of people can relate to the struggles of these characters. At times you feel like all of our characters' psychology are both right and wrong at the same time. That's a generational thing... the young can't see the struggles of the old and the history behind their aggravating psychological build-up; and the old carrying baggages of their past and whilst intimidating in their behaviors and mannerism towards the young, they still have a deeper and well-meaning intent - all they hope is for their successive generations to be better. All of the characters can easily relate to us the audience - the embarrassed son of an eccentric and crazed mother; the loving grandmother who's harsh but cares so abundantly for her grandson. The film also features the beauty of the hill people's sense of community, I don't know if it's a subtle intention by Ron Howard but it suddenly feels like a small tribute to that culture for me. And I guess I'd have a soft-spot for this film because of the grandmother and how much she reminds me of mine... and that hits really close to home.
Overall, fantastic work by Ron Howard, another hats-off to you, sir. And oh but of course, Amy Adams and Glenn Close... these ladies are getting two easy tickets to the Oscar next year. They both disappeared completely in their roles and there wasn't one moment where I saw Amy Adams or Glenn Close but only Beverly and Mamaw. Their performances were FANTASTICAL. Makes me want to point and say "now that's what I call acting". Both Amy and Glenn have been so overlooked by the Academy for years and hopefully this film and performances do them justice.
Carol (2015)
A film of class & elegance
This picture exudes an old sense of class & elegance. And the way it demonstrates so is through the outstanding and superb use of cinematography. I mean, my goodness me the cinematography is breathtaking and mesmerizing. If I'm not mistaken, the very underrated director Todd Haynes chose his cinematographer Ed Lachman to shoot the film using a 16mm in order to give it an older aesthetic and it was impeccably beautiful. Probably in my top 5 films with inspiring cinematography ever.
The way the story ebbs & flows is just so natural, it's different from any other love story, and than other gay love story. The plot is natural, the chemistry between Cate and Rooney is marvelousl well-directed and well-written. And the dramas that the two individually experiences throw out the film is so aligned with the archetypal struggles that many gay women go through, not just that but the dramas are in harmony with the ages of the two women - Carol is stuck in her generation's struggle which is marriage and custody and an envious husband; Therese is stuck in her generation's struggle of a young woman's life infused by the idea and pressures of marriage and men's pursuit for her.
Last but not least, that performance by Cate Blanchett is one of the very few acting performances I can proudly describe as "mindblowing" and it blew my mind. Blew. My. Mind. I've watched this picture 3 times and it never fails to stimulates my artistic impulse.
The Dressmaker (2015)
"You've never met the rubbish"
Every now and again I come back to watch this picture, it's very personal and relatable to me. I too used to grow up being the blacksheep of my community for my sexuality. Everybody in every nook and cranny hassles me and my family off for having a gay son, and mind you it was not a religious community, they just discriminated because they simply didn't like it. Then a few years later after I left that town, I became successful and have made a name for myself and going places, so I decided one summer to return back to that town to tend to my mother and grandmother still living there and still being hissed at by the local townspeople. Having seen me back, they saw clearly how much I changed inside and out, from the way I talk and think to the way I dress. Just like Tilly in the story, I was the one who stood out among the rest of the average folks in terms of how I look. And yet, my notoriety never left the local consciousness of them and I was being gossiped and looked at with strange mockery eyes. Still, I am now a grown up and wanted to contribute to this little town no matter how much they unreasonably despises me. They are now benefited from my success and financials and began taking advantage of me when it comes to asking for favor, but outside of favors, their distaste towards me never shifted. Just like in the film, my grandmother sadly passed away during my visit and my mom refuses to leave for she has become too accustomed to the town no matter how cruel they are. But I left and I brought all the benefits I helped for my town with me because I soon realized they don't deserve it. Just like the townspeople in the film, the townspeople in my town were also brass, shallow, gossiping, lustful for luxury, greedy, vindictive, malicious, and nasty (I even had a teacher like Miss Beula Harridene). I wish I could have left the town in sweet revenge like Tilly did in the film. But that's why, by and large, as you can see this picture really connects with me, a lot of the events mirror my own experience and I shared above. Some people dislike the picture understandably because they cannot connect with the character and the story, but I find it very empathetic because if the story speaks to you personally then it is much easier to connect with it.
Raging Bull (1980)
Before Wolf of Wall Street there was Raging Bull
Don't go into this thinking it's a boxing film, but rather about a man who was a boxer. Scorsese's cinematic biopics, namely The Aviator, Wolf of Wall Street, and this one are so unique because of exactly that. Most biopics are made about big figures such as a singer or a famous historical character and they made a film about the life of those figures. However, Scorsese doesn't go that route, it's as if he carefully chooses and studies a figure with an interesting character and wants to take a cinematic portrayal of that famous person's psychology and bring it to light on the big screen. The screenwriter Paul Schrader (who was also the screenwriter for Taxi Driver) wrote this film with the intention of not focusing too much on fight strategy and boxing, because as we see, the film is a character study of Jake LaMotta. It shows a man who is paralyzed by sexual insecurity, envy, and rage and his fights in the ring are curiously not motivated by tactics or even a desire to triumph but by his fear and rage. I have to admit, I did expect a boxing flick going into this picture but I got something even better.
The Truman Show (1998)
Viewer Culture
I think The Truman Show is more than just about being entrapped in an identity serves only as a spectacle and that the world around you are just arbitrary and made-up, which follows by a wish to be liberated from that simulated reality. That is what the surface of the picture demonstrates, but I also see it as a demonstration of this viewer culture we have in this modern age of social media. Everything we watch on screen are virtually entertainment for us whether it is about two people yelling and fighting on the street or a reality show about god knows what. I love how the picture let us see that in the final scene where, after everyone had finished cheering for Truman's escape, they immediately just continued to deliberating which channels or shows to watch next. In other words, they never really cared about Truman's life and freedom or his desire to escape, they only see it as a part of their entertainment. Truman's happiness, sadness, struggles are nothing more than just entertainment and good TV for the audience. Additionally, if I may add, I love how Truman didn't care or inquire much about what is the real world like - for all he knows, the real world could be a dystopian wasteland and humans in chains, but regardless he just wanted to be anything by a spectacle, anything but living in a surreal and superficial world. Both the two points I observed above just shows this picture as having more aspects than just about "living in a fake world" and the filmmakers did a stupendous job at writing that out for us.
Cape Fear (1991)
Scorsese's most Hitchcockian project
Out of all of Scorsese's films that are heavily inspired by neo-realist Italian cinema, this one I can only describe as the most Hitchcockian - from the plot, technique, camerawork, acting, score. It is hard for me to describe something as Hitchcockian, especially when it comes to judging the story but this one really fits the book in my opinion. Phenomenal acting by Robert De Niro, I couldn't believe he could pull of a portrayal that is so entirely different from his usual roles. The fact that Nick Notle did The Prince of Tides and this picture in one year is very very commendable. Jessica Lange, I mean what can I say. In addition to the acting, Scorsese must have had his actors to act in resemblance to the acting style of a 1970s thriller. That, and the camerawork in the transition from scene to scene and reaction to reaction, also gives this film the 1970s feel. Plus, the score as well. And the use of distorted imagery that also resembles that of say, Vertigo by Alfred Hitchcock. The plot is not just about a psychotic quest for some stupid vengeance, but a psychotic quest for vengeance with depth. Max Caddy seeks revenge against his former attorney not just out of what he sees as injustice and unfairness but also from the philosophizing he accumulated during his time in prison. This idea is represented metaphorically in the scene where we see one of Caddy's tattoo is a scale where "truth" and "justice" (or biblical justice) are balanced. The tattoo represents all of Caddy's psychology and philosophy and that his actions are justified to him by some biblical notion of justice and truth. Caddy also says that they will experience loss, "loss of freedom" and "loss of humanity". And I guess in the end, the Bowden family did lost that because they have become forever frightful and traumatized. Overall, this may not be on my top 10 of Scorsese's best but it was a very very smart venture into Hitchcockian cinema style.
The Aviator (2004)
The Academic Definition of a Cinematic Biopic
There is something peculiar and special about Martin Scorsese's biopics that stood way out of your average biopics. Scorsese's main focus in making a biopic is not to just pay homage to the figure he is attributing to or just laying out events after events, but he makes it into a character study. It is the same greatness he puts into Raging Bull and The Wolf of Wall Street. In this seminal work, we the audience explore the life of Howard Hughes and his battle with obsessive-compulsive disorder - a very serious mental illness. As well as shows his character's rise and fall as a billionaire as he strives in life in amidst of the struggles and challenges from his mental illness.
One of the most fascinating things about this picture is the technical achievement of it, particularly the cinematography. The story behind it is Scorsese's reminiscence of watching films of the era when he was a child, and he wanted to translate that color techniques in modern filmmaking context. Phenomenal work by cinematographer Robert Richardson who successfully imitates the early American Technicolor dye-transfer process to replicate the vintage look. The cinematography is an evolving color, with two-strip and then three-strip and then modern. All of which is reflective of the period of the time it depicts. Additionally, the films' use of color alteration in every situation, emotion, production design, costumes, and make-up are all used in a very very purposeful way to transcend the depth and meaning through all that. And that is the beauty of a Martin Scorsese picture.
Now one cannot praise this picture without acknowledging the two elephants in the room: the acting performances by Leo DiCaprio and Cate Blanchett. This is my personal favorite Leo DiCaprio's performance for the way he just throws himself into the role with a lot of flexibility and portraying the essential emotions of Howard Hughes so intricately. Cate Blanchett is my second favorite actress ever, I never thought she could nail Katherine Hepburn's accent and mannerism like that. She truly truly pays tribute to the great Katherine Hepburn herself. Cate Blanchett has pulled off many amazing performances over the years, as Queen Elizabeth I, Katherine Hepburn, Bob Dylan. If that is not range, I'm sorry but I don't know what is.
Overall, Scorsese's biopics are always more than just a documentary or an average biopic, he always ventures deep into the psychology and emotion of the character and not just events after events. Scorsese's films will be studied for years and forevermore.
Birdman or (The Unexpected Virtue of Ignorance) (2014)
Man's desire for meaning and art
I have always knew Alejandro González Iñárritu had it in him ever since Babel, and it goes to prove himself with seminar masterful works such as The Revenant and this masterpiece. The camerawork and cinematography is worked in a way that is to show the entire film was recorded in one take. This technical achievement is inspired straight out of the Hitchcockian technique in Rope (1948). Iñárritu has a good reason for using the one-take technique; the entire picture surrounds the protagonist and documents his every move and events transitioning one after another. In each those uninterrupted sequences we get to follow our protagonist layer after layer as a gradual continuous unraveling of his quest and yearning for art.
The film is about man's desire for meaning and art. Our protagonist has before starred in a popular superhero character and his fame and career has only been popular because of that role. Now he wants to mature into a serious actor and take on a play on Broadway. But this proves a challenge because the superficiality of his past superhero role is the only thing that seems to excite his audience and make him relevant.
One of the scenes that expresses the baggage he carries for his superhero role is when Tabitha the critic insulted him and says he does not cut out to be attempt at serious and mature and real art because of "people like him" who only a spectacle in pop culture, and that the fact that someone with a superficial background like that to take on Broadway is ludicrous to her.
But finally the film gave a revelation to our protagonist when he did nail his Broadway role which gave astute recognition from his peers. Hence, the critic referred to him as "the unexpected virtue of ignorance", that someone who played a superhero role could unexpectedly pull off a grand performance in theater with nothing but realism. The third act of the film leaves a lot to be interpreted, but this is one of the few amazing philosophical and profound films that was fresh and original and did not need to be adapted from another material.
Three Billboards Outside Ebbing, Missouri (2017)
No closure
There are three stages in which the main emotions of the film plays out: anger, blame, and acceptance.
Anger: the first emotion in this film, followed by subset of emotions: grief, remorse, guilt. Mildred Hayes has lost Angela, her 19-year-old daughter. She lost her to male lust, aggression, rape, murder. The rapist was never caught. Mildred seethes at those two haunting thoughts: murder and injustice. Closure isn't possible within a broken circle. To be whole again justice must occur.
Out of anger that her daughter's fate is not dealt with, she paid for and put up three provocative and controversial billboards. This gained the attention and frustration of the local townspeople, especially the police force - with chief Willoughby and officer Dixon as the central characters.
Second stage is blame, Mildred blames the police forces who are too busy bullying black folks instead of solving actual crimes. The gravity of her blame is expressed in her conversation with the priest at the dinner table. Where she said that an individual is already culpable of a crime committed by a group merely by being in association with that group. Therefore, to Mildred, it is not enough to blame the individual by the totality of those associated in any way.
And so not long after that, chief Willoughby committed suicide due to cancer, and he did not want to face the reality of his loved ones surrounding his dying body and tending to it as it ebbs and flows away. Immediately, the townspeople, Willoughby's wife, and officer Dixon blamed Mildred for the chief's death when in actuality she has nothing to do with it.
This is the reflection and mirroring of Mildred's anger and blame of the injustice of her daughter's death to the police department. It is not necessary a direct blame but rather she was looking for somebody to blame and demand her frustration towards, and it was the police department.
Dixon also blames the billboards for the death of chief Willoughby. Even though logically it has nothing to do with his death. He became angry that his faithful colleague had to die, and in amidst of this frustrating case with the billboards, Dixon puts the blame on them and on Mildred.
The best films are often emotional journeys, explorations of personal revelation and evolution. In this one we mainly ride with Mildred. But there are others who suffer too, as the police officers. The evolution and development of our characters came from lessons: Dixon learned from reading Willoughby's last letter to him that Dixon may never live up to his true potential and promises when he is filled with anger and resentment. Hence, this constitute an ultimate point in the film later on, in order to move forward to an improved version of yourself, you must forsaken the unnecessary negative baggages that only weighs you down and clouds your judgment. And it was then did Dixon finally understood and wishes to carry on Mildred's unfinished case and give her closure.
But wait, the point of the film is that there is no closure. For where does Mildred seeks closure from? Where does peace and acceptance come from? From the billboards? From law courts? From police reports? Does Dixon's closure comes from exacting revenge on the billboards out of anger for Willoughby's death? The film asks because it wants to know, suggesting that surface can't be enough. And that it is not about closure, but about acceptance.
Which brings me to the final stage of the emotions surrounding the film: acceptance. At the end, Mildred learns that anger only begets greater anger. However, does this truly bring peace to a person? We don't know. Maybe surface justice (courts, trials, imprisonment, punishment, execution) could bring closure to a person. Which is precisely why the film ends with Mildred and Dixon driving off to kill the suspected rapist but do not know whether they should. But regardless, they keep on driving on anyway, hoping an answer would come to them on the way.
The screenwriting and message of the film is extremely profound, so much so that it falls into my personal top 10 of all time. The acting by Frances McDormand is just masterful and an Oscar well-deserved in my opinion. The film also brings with me a certain peace and content and it is a very personal thing to me.
Eyes Wide Shut (1999)
Traumatizing and Disturbing
There are instances where a film traumatizes me beyond beliefs, that makes me staying up late thinking about the deep and frightful trench of this human experience, and Stanley Kubrick's films never fail to enact that part of my psyche - to dare to provoke in me this dimension of human nature that we don't usually like to visit. And this film traumatizes me just like that. I was too psychologically affected that I did not bother washing my dishes and read my book before bed (my daily routines that I regularly enjoy). That is needless to say this film struck me to the core, and I am still shook by it. It is Kubrick's last venture into the study of humanity and human nature.
We the audience are embarked on a sexual odyssey with our protagonist to which we explore the sexual subconscious of the human psyche, represented through material events acting as archetypes. Sex is a lot of things; it can be marriage and fertility, the emancipation from virginity and empowerment of women's position in men (as the conversation between the Hungarian man Alice indicates), it can be solace and comfort for pains (Marion kissing Dr. Bill after her father's death) , it can be a mean for financial survival (prostitution), it can be kink (the two men having sex with the store owner's daughter while dressed in women's garments), and the masonic elites ritual performed in a dark and sinister proportion. Then there is the creepy mysterious soundtrack that I'm guessing was composed in two notes, the tune keeps ringing in my head as if a nightmare. The film leaves a lot of questions and hidden meanings that I am determined to muster out an answer and interpretation, but rest assured that I may probably will never watch it again.
Kubrick's films have always discussed radical and controversial topics which are visual literary discussion into human behaviorism and subconscious. Thank you Stanley Kubrick for everything, and I hope there are people like me who should praise and uphold his films and legacy, and to make sure they are way up there with the titans of art.
Lady Bird (2017)
Comedic Realism
This is one of those teen films that isn't superficial drama but instead is very artistic. Greta Gerwig grabs my heart on this one. I feel like as a young adult, this reflected so well everything I was as a teenager, I feel bad for not watching this few years ago when I was 16. It is like all the events here did not really happen to me, but did at the same time, I'm sure Greta feels the same. It's comedic realism, but the realism comes first
Game of Thrones (2011)
Near perfect masterpiece
It hurts me like hell to have rated this a 9 because it could have easily been a 10 if it wasn't for season 7 and 8. There are enough commentary on the finale so I won't go on a tangent. But I'll just say, setting the bad bits aside that this show is still a divine, everything about it was just too perfect to be true.
No Country for Old Men (2007)
A bitter ending to the Spaghetti Western saga
No Country for Old Men ushers in the ending to the Western era, and arguably gives a middle finger to the moral philosophy of the era. It shows that the old timer's Western ways of The Good, The Bad, and the Ugly; and Unforgiven no longer applied in contemporary society. In those Clint Eastwood-esque Westerns, there are always the moral law-abiding protagonists hunting down and confronting outlaws, and ending in an epic duel. But everything the old timers think they know are all gone as society progresses in an age of urbanization and technocracy. And the cinematography of the film showcases a cold and somewhat dark and devoid sense to it contrast to a more uplifting and positive like the older Western eras.
The film begins with sheriff Bell (an archetypal figure of integrity before the law) narrating how him and his father and grandfather were all men of the law and order, but for Bell it is now different because he has to live in an age where that kind of law and order is hazardous. However, in the conversation between cousin Ellis and sheriff Bell, Ellis shed a light on Bell that this is the way things have always been even during the olden days. The film also ends with Bell's stupor reflection that the old world and all he thought where true (and could be true) are just romanticization of an deal, and that he had are all just a dream. Anton Chigur is the symbol of the death of the old ways, he is an agent of order, his only principle is no principle, which is emphasized perfectly in his line, "If the rule you followed brought you here, what good is the rule". Some might say he is one side of the same coin as sheriff Bell who is also an agent of order, but with different meaning of order. That is because order and chaos is subjective, chaos for a fly just means order for a spider.
But Anton's philosophy was challenged when conversing with Carla Jeans, where she told him, "No, events that occur to people and things are not of a random order because you do have a choice to kill me if you want to, only you can call the shot; not the coin, not some mysterious rule of chaos in the universe". In this instance, Carla Jeans implies that randomness only occur due to a non-existent of agency in things, and the act of Anton killing her does involve a luxury of choice, and agency. The symbolism of the coin represents randomness of things in the universe. We all arrive exactly where we are the same as a 22 years old coin, there is no divine justice, there is no divine governance. God is silence, he just watches the randomness of his creation unfolds, and doesn't care. All things and events are random, including the metamorphism of morality and order between the traditional West and contemporary society.
That is to say, I don't think the film is about "present bad, past good". In the last scene of Bell's dream he told the story of his father and he was filled with hope that his father will be the one guiding him through the darkness, and whichever the dark road takes Bell, his father will be there for him in the end. But then he woke up. This doesn't imply how back in Bell's days thing were more ordered and structured and better. But rather, as a child, we all seek solace and look towards our role models (i.e mother and father), and we were surrounded with protection from them, and thus create a sense of justice in a child. Hence, the phrases often come up such as "My mother used to say", or "the dream my father believed in". But as we grow older, we carry with us that innocent perception of justice and order. As the beginning of the film indicates that Bell's father and grandfather were lawmen, so Bell naturally have an ideal model of justice and order and morality in his mind. But then he is disillusioned from it all when he realizes that the world is no longer like that, and that he should surrender and retire and give in to the randomness of the world. BUT, in the conversation with cousin Ellis, Ellis shows Bell that "No, not that the world is now different and society's conception of morality, justice, and order has changed and declined, but those ideas have never really existed to begin with.
So in a sense, we could interpret that we are all the "old men" the title of the film was talking about. We all held the innocence and visionary of a younger self and always believed in that and strife to see that change to the world. But then as we get older, we realize the true trepidation and premonition of not just the real world, but the modern world. So, "No Country For Old Men" could even be titled "No Country For Young Men" too in a way, but that title would cause an even more thematic confusion. But in all honesty, we can interpret this mechanism in other ways too, but whatever conclusion we arrived at, it is just the same way the coin did.
The Godfather (1972)
The Van Gogh equivalent of films
I have had a distinct pleasure to have watched this picture for the first time in a 35mm screen this year in a cinema in London that shows classic films. I refrained from watching it years ago in my teenage years because my ignorant past thought this film was overrated, but honestly, there is no possible word or expression that can describe how wrong I was. The cinematography of this picture is so unheard of and monumental that every frame of this picture looks like something that could be hung as a painting in a museum. The story brings with it elements of something that came out of a Shakespearean Tragedy. I have watched it 7 times or more in a short time, and it takes A LOT to make me watch a film for a second time, let alone 7. It is one of, if not my favorite film of all time. If human civilization were to go extinct, this should be one of the few pieces of art that must survive for future intelligent lifeforms to discover and marvel at.
Glee (2009)
Execution of the concept could have been better
Glee's central message is about how music can express one's innermost feelings and thoughts when words cannot articulate it. It also sought to convey the message for the value of the arts, that if children and young people seek to invest more in the arts (music, films, theater, poetry, literature, satirism, etc) then their general emotional intelligence would be enhanced more than being forcibly learning the sciences that whereas are important, but aren't for everybody. But too bad, Glee turned it into a teen drama flick, though some story arc are very effective and less superficial, such as Rachel's quest towards Broadway, to which the show pays good tribute to Barbra Streisand's Funny Girl (which is my childhood musical).
But my main tick with the show is the writing of the dialogue, it is as if every character has the same way of talking, I lost count of the time somebody in the show says "this person taught me how to be a man better than anybody I known". It was cool at first, but it started getting cringey. Speaking of cringe, the worst character of the show is Mr. Schue - an emotionally immature man, who, as Sue Sylvester puts it, an adult man whose friend circles are underage teenagers. Seriously, I can rant on all day about this bag of meat. I cannot see how and why he is inspirational to the students, but whatever. He's such a creepy who laughs when his students twerk in front of him, and values twerking more than his student's right to go to the bathroom. This dude is so emotionally immature, he stole Finn's jacket and stood by as his students quarreled and conflicted over who stole it. Speaking of his relationship with Finn, I mean Sue was so right in saying he has no adult friends because the way he asked Finn to be his best man and said "you taught me how to be a man more than anybody I ever known" (Yep, there's that line again), and wow...imagine saying that to a teenager. Oh not to mention, marveling at Finn in the shower and couldn't think of any better way than to blackmailing him by framing him with weed.
The show and its characters have this very unhealthy tendency of emotional attachment. When some of the seniors have graduated in season 3, some characters still going back to their high school and hanging out there like it's nobody's business instead of heading to college and move on. Also, after season 3, these alumnis still go back to their precious Glee club probably everyday as if they have never left. But I can probably empathize with the show's writers because they had to come up with a material for season 4 but it is hard doing so without including the past characters in the Glee club, it is very hard keeping this together and I can understand their attempts at doing so. But on a personal note, after season 3, I could not care less for the new characters, I guess we are too emotionally attached to the former characters. But I mean, whatever. The only storyline I was interested in after season 3 was Rachel and Kurt's lives in New York and pursuing their dreams.
The only reason why I am giving this a 7/10 instead of a 6/10 is because of Kurt.
The Irishman (2019)
A mafioso genre at the twilight of its life
Scorsese is a titan in the motion picture industry ! I have watched this film maybe 6 to 7 times in a short span of time already. I am a huge fan of the mafioso cinema, from 1962's Mafioso to GoodFellas, Casino, The Sopranos, Once Upon A Time In America, The Godfather trilogy. And this film definitely, without a shadow of a doubt, stands up there with the legends. It pays homage to the gangster and mafioso genre and instead of romanticizing the world of crime, Scorsese shows us the vulnerable end of that world. The last 30 minutes impact me more than any films have had for a very very long time. It shows the fear of old age, reflecting on a lifetime of crime, killing for an ideal you believe is for the good of your kin, but it only deprives you of your kin. The fact that this picture took 10 years or so to make because Scorsese was having difficulties allocating the funds for it, while Hollywood greenlit remakes, reboots, sequels, prequels, Disney live-action, superhero flicks, and CATS... just show how ridiculous it is. If I heard there is a film being made starring Robert De Niro, Al Pacino, and Joe Pesci, directed by Martin fucking Scorsese, I would have handed over my rent money ! Those who says this was too long or too boring are probably the same people who the next thing they do is to continue to watch 7 hours of a dumb rom com. The only reason why I regretfully gave it a 9/10 was because of Scorsese's rather conservative way of keeping the original character in their original physique while playing younger versions of themselves, this could have easily been resolved with a stunt double.